PaddockLad 14638 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Whats all this new craic about the # of better teams in Europe btw? Is that the new attendances argument. I've never said he didn't do a good job at Spurs btw. Finishing in the top 4 twice is good. Letting your own ambition to be England manage fuck up your season and likely break up the successful team you have put together over the past 4 years is not Is there any actual proof for that?....its what the media party line is but that automatically makes me think its largely bollocks. Am sure its part of the reason, but just because its the consensus doesn't make it automatically the case. What did he start doing wrong comapred to the previous 2-3 years? team talks brief and uninspiring? training consisting of a game of shove ha'penny in the pub round the corner? If you say that the players reacted to the uncertainty surrounding his future then thats down to the fickle bunch twats themselves (and no doubt their agents) but did they visibly "down tools" on the pitch?...Spurs form hit the buffers because thats what happens to some teams every season. Why did we blow a 12 point lead in 96?...why did manu blow a 13 point lead the following season?....I don't think theres any rhyme or reason to it. I actually think he FA were scared off from approaching Redknapp when Levy said it would cost them a fortune in compo and thats when the big fall out with Redknapp occured. Finishing 4th after looking set for 3rd minimum and being unlucky with Chelsea etc isnt grounds for sacking, thinking the chairman is a cunt for denying you the chance to manage your country and more than likely telling him so in the middle of contract negtiations probably is. And iyam we haven't seen the last of him in a court room, perhaps Levy knows the score on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 5941 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 (edited) Geordie to mackem translation? You're as intuitive as ever I see. I did wonder if it was Willow Jnr, but I thought your craic would be better tbh Edited June 15, 2012 by J69 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnneFranksDrumkit 0 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 I did wonder if it was Willow Jnr, but I thought your craic would be better tbh You can answer post #172 any time you like btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14638 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Admin 6 making him/her self right at home here. I take it all the admins who were fucking about on nutz constitute the majority of the characters whove joined in the last day or so?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 5941 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 You can answer post #172 any time you like btw. The two points don't contradict each other. £47million is a fortune. Football is a billion pound game. Next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 It's a win-win for me like. Odious cunt Redknapp has the embarrassment of being sacked, odious club Tottenham are going to die on their arse. Excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 16734 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 What has come out since he has been sacked? Whats the reason he was sacked? Surly not just for failing to finish 4th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnneFranksDrumkit 0 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 That would be harsh like. Since he did finish 4th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34638 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 "The club wanted to go in a different direction." Down presumably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9017 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 It's money. Of course it's about money. I'm not sure where the confusion can lie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetleftpeg 0 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 I know he was acquitted of the charges against him earlier in the year but that court case made him look dodgy as fuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 16734 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 I know he was acquitted of the charges against him earlier in the year but that court case made him look dodgy as fuck. Yeh, I am sure its something behind the scenes. Would love it if the saggy faced cunt didnt get back into management Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34638 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 It's money. Of course it's about money. I'm not sure where the confusion can lie? Aye something like: Linked with England, opens up contract negotiations with inflated wages on the agenda. England goes away, club realises inflated wages are no longer necessary, Harry disagrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnneFranksDrumkit 0 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 The two points don't contradict each other. £47million is a fortune. Football is a billion pound game. Next? It's an absolute fortune in relation to what most other people earn but, spent over the period in question, it clearly isn't an absolute fortune when compared to what Spurs' rivals were spending. It's a nonsensical comparison if it isn't being applied to the latter tbh. Knowing you as I do, you'll realise I'm right but you'll still probably argue rather than admit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 16734 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Aye something like: Linked with England, opens up contract negotiations with inflated wages on the agenda. England goes away, club realises inflated wages are no longer necessary, Harry disagrees. So why sack him when he has a year left? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4229 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 So why sack him when he has a year left? would you trust a bloke you know is leaving in a year who has argued out of a new contract with getting the team in the CL? better to cut the losses and get someone in who wants the job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9017 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 So why sack him when he has a year left? He's a lame duck manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 5941 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 It's an absolute fortune in relation to what most other people earn but, spent over the period in question, it clearly isn't an absolute fortune when compared to what Spurs' rivals were spending. It's a nonsensical comparison if it isn't being applied to the latter tbh. Knowing you as I do, you'll realise I'm right but you'll still probably argue rather than admit it. Spurs rivals for 3rd this year were ourselves and Arsenal. Which team has the biggest net spend of the last 4 seasons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wykikitoon 16734 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 would you trust a bloke you know is leaving in a year who has argued out of a new contract with getting the team in the CL? better to cut the losses and get someone in who wants the job A manager that supposedly had good relations with the board? Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4229 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 thats gone if we're assuming the fallout on the contract happened though. especially if theyre thinking, as a lot are, that the england link contributed to spurs poor finish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34638 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 When was the last time it became apparent that a manager was leaving at the end of his contract, and things went well for the team. It never works out and if anything it's to their credit that Spurs weren't prepared to allow it to happen. Once the decision is made that he won't be staying on, they can't afford a year where they tread water, so they chose to get rid immediately. A less ambitious club would have let him see out the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnneFranksDrumkit 0 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Spurs rivals for 3rd this year were ourselves and Arsenal. Which team has the biggest net spend of the last 4 seasons? So you acknowledge he did much better (in the league) than the likes of Chelsea who comfortable outspent him? Quality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 5941 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 So you acknowledge he did much better (in the league) than the likes of Chelsea who comfortable outspent him? Quality The same Chelsea who sacked their manager for their poor league form when it looked like the weren't going to make it into the champions league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14638 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 When was the last time it became apparent that a manager was leaving at the end of his contract, and things went well for the team. It never works out and if anything it's to their credit that Spurs weren't prepared to allow it to happen. Once the decision is made that he won't be staying on, they can't afford a year where they tread water, so they chose to get rid immediately. A less ambitious club would have let him see out the year. Thats what Shpeherd did with SBR...told the world he was in his last season at NUFC and suddenly Dyer was trying to tell Bobby where he should be playing, the odious little cunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio 0 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 The worse era thing is countered by the fact Bobby had to regularly play the likes of Griffin, O'Brien, Acuna, Quinn, Cort, Ambrose, Hughes, Bramble etc. Yeah we had some good players too but Harry has Van Der Vaart, Bale, Adebayor, Parker, Kaboul, Lennon, Gallas, Modric, Walker, King etc. With the players he has in that team, and to lose the lead he had over Arsenal for 3rd place, he can't be too surprised he has been booted The worse era thing is countered by the fact Bobby had to regularly play the likes of Griffin, O'Brien, Acuna, Quinn, Cort, Ambrose, Hughes, Bramble etc. Yeah we had some good players too but Harry has Van Der Vaart, Bale, Adebayor, Parker, Kaboul, Lennon, Gallas, Modric, Walker, King etc. With the players he has in that team, and to lose the lead he had over Arsenal for 3rd place, he can't be too surprised he has been booted You can't argue for Robson having to use shit players when he signed most of them He blew nearly £20 million on Cort, Viana and Bassedas so he had plenty to spend, not as much as Redknapp but as Stevie has pointed out prices have shot up since then, Robson done it in the days of the local chairman apart from the past full season where as Redknapp managed it in the era of billionaire owners. Without working it out I'd say there isn't many more clubs that spent more net than Tottenham under Redknapp than there was spending bigger than Robson for us at time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now